OBJECTIVES: To study consumer acceptance of unmilled brown and undermilled rice among urban south Indians. METHODS: Overweight and normal weight adults living in slum and nonslum residences in Chennai participated (n = 82). Bapatla (BPT) and Uma (red pigmented) rice varieties were chosen. These rice varieties were dehusked (unmilled, 0% polish) and further milled to 2.3% and 4.4% polishing (undermilled). Thus, 9 rice samples in both raw and parboiled forms were provided for consumer tasting over a period of 3 days. A 7-point hedonic scale was used to rate consumer preferences. A validated questionnaire was used to collect demographic, anthropometric, medical history, physical activity, dietary intake data, and willingness of the consumers to switch over to brown rice. RESULTS: Consumers reported that the color, appearance, texture, taste, and overall quality of the 4.4% polished rice was strongly preferred in both varieties and forms. Ratings for 0% polished (brown rice) were substantially lower than those of 2.3% polished rice, which were intermediate in ratings between 0% and 4.4% polishing. However, most of the consumers (93%) expressed a willingness to substitute brown or 2.3% polished rice, if affordable, after the taste tests and education on nutritional and health benefits of whole grains. CONCLUSION: Though most consumers preferred polished white rice, education regarding health benefits may help this population switch to brown or undermilled rice. Cooking quality and appearance of the grains were perceived as the most important factors to consider when purchasing rice among Chennai urban adults.
OBJECTIVES: To study consumer acceptance of unmilled brown and undermilled rice among urban south Indians. METHODS: Overweight and normal weight adults living in slum and nonslum residences in Chennai participated (n = 82). Bapatla (BPT) and Uma (red pigmented) rice varieties were chosen. These rice varieties were dehusked (unmilled, 0% polish) and further milled to 2.3% and 4.4% polishing (undermilled). Thus, 9 rice samples in both raw and parboiled forms were provided for consumer tasting over a period of 3 days. A 7-point hedonic scale was used to rate consumer preferences. A validated questionnaire was used to collect demographic, anthropometric, medical history, physical activity, dietary intake data, and willingness of the consumers to switch over to brown rice. RESULTS: Consumers reported that the color, appearance, texture, taste, and overall quality of the 4.4% polished rice was strongly preferred in both varieties and forms. Ratings for 0% polished (brown rice) were substantially lower than those of 2.3% polished rice, which were intermediate in ratings between 0% and 4.4% polishing. However, most of the consumers (93%) expressed a willingness to substitute brown or 2.3% polished rice, if affordable, after the taste tests and education on nutritional and health benefits of whole grains. CONCLUSION: Though most consumers preferred polished white rice, education regarding health benefits may help this population switch to brown or undermilled rice. Cooking quality and appearance of the grains were perceived as the most important factors to consider when purchasing rice among Chennai urban adults.
Authors: S Shobana; N G Malleshi; V Sudha; D Spiegelman; B Hong; F B Hu; W C Willett; K Krishnaswamy; V Mohan Journal: Int J Food Sci Nutr Date: 2011-05-27 Impact factor: 3.833
Authors: J Salmerón; A Ascherio; E B Rimm; G A Colditz; D Spiegelman; D J Jenkins; M J Stampfer; A L Wing; W C Willett Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 1997-04 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Matthias B Schulze; Simin Liu; Eric B Rimm; JoAnn E Manson; Walter C Willett; Frank B Hu Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Teresa T Fung; Frank B Hu; Mark A Pereira; Simin Liu; Meir J Stampfer; Graham A Colditz; Walter C Willett Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: V S Malik; V Sudha; N M Wedick; M RamyaBai; P Vijayalakshmi; N Lakshmipriya; R Gayathri; A Kokila; C Jones; B Hong; R Li; K Krishnaswamy; R M Anjana; D Spiegelman; W C Willett; F B Hu; V Mohan Journal: Br J Nutr Date: 2019-04-22 Impact factor: 3.718
Authors: Josiemer Mattei; Vasanti Malik; Nicole M Wedick; Frank B Hu; Donna Spiegelman; Walter C Willett; Hannia Campos Journal: Global Health Date: 2015-06-04 Impact factor: 4.185
Authors: Mika Matsuzaki; Nick Birk; Sabri Bromage; Liza Bowen; Carolina Batis; Teresa T Fung; Yanping Li; Meir J Stampfer; Megan Deitchler; Walter C Willett; Wafaie W Fawzi; Sanjay Kinra; Shilpa N Bhupathiraju Journal: J Nutr Date: 2021-10-23 Impact factor: 4.798
Authors: Balaji Bhavadharini; Viswanathan Mohan; Mahshid Dehghan; Sumathy Rangarajan; Sumathi Swaminathan; Annika Rosengren; Andreas Wielgosz; Alvaro Avezum; Patricio Lopez-Jaramillo; Fernando Lanas; Antonio L Dans; Karen Yeates; Paul Poirier; Jephat Chifamba; Khalid F Alhabib; Noushin Mohammadifard; Katarzyna Zatońska; Rasha Khatib; Mirac Vural Keskinler; Li Wei; Chuangshi Wang; Xiaoyun Liu; Romaina Iqbal; Rita Yusuf; Edelweiss Wentzel-Viljoen; Afzalhussein Yusufali; Rafael Diaz; Ng Kien Keat; P V M Lakshmi; Noorhassim Ismail; Rajeev Gupta; Lia M Palileo-Villanueva; Patrick Sheridan; Andrew Mente; Salim Yusuf Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2020-09-01 Impact factor: 19.112